Blaine, I went back and re-read the scripture references in the excerpts
you quoted from the orthodox web pages. You know, while I do see that we
shall share in the "riches" of Jesus (which i do not believe means "become a
god"), I did not find anything that convinced me that we would become g
From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Blaine: The doctrine of deification is quite plain in the Bible.
According to mormons, so is the "doctrine of polygamy" and the "doctrine of
baptism for the dead", which I do not see in the Bible...yes, I have read
the bible looking for those doctri
DAVEH: LOLOh, you are a badd boy, John! :-D
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Don't forget to brush your tooth.
JD
--
~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six
In a message dated 4/7/2005 8:03:20 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
..Our part is a process -- but God's part is not. You can't get "process" out of Gog exhangeing faith for rigghteous. How long does it take to make change
I was almost sober when I wrote this. Man, am I
In a message dated 4/7/2005 7:53:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Romans 4 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. How was it then reckoned? when he was in circ
In a message dated 4/7/2005 3:06:45 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
JD writes:
In Col 1:17ff, we find the fact of reconciliation presented and the purpose of this reconciliation put forth. We have been reconciled so that we might be holy, blameless and above reproach in H
In a message dated 4/6/2005 11:05:13 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have been doing a little thinking about various aspects of my counseling ministry in view of the triune considerations. And I see, almost daily, the value of the teaching. In II Cor 5:21, we are told tha
Romans 4 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.
Notice that
In a message dated 4/7/2005 2:41:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John in orange this post.
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 12:30:54 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Et al: I have been doing a little thinking about various aspects of my counseling
Blaine: The doctrine of deification is quite plain in the Bible. As I said in
a post to DavidM, I did not really need to go to the Eastern Church for
support, except for the fact that apparently you are either ignorant of the
Biblical passages supporting this doctrine, or you choose to ignore
Thanks for your input, Judy. I'm sure you've tried
to understand it. Tell me: Do you agree?
Bill
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 5:32
PM
Subject: Re: [
David writes > Careful, Bill.
I know too many people who would take this as an incitement toward
following in Paul Hill's steps.
I get your point, David. But if my statement were
to incite anyone to the use of violence, I will have been terribly
misunderstood. I think there are bette
-- "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Blaine wrote:
> ... the Eastern Orthodox Church has more members/adherants than
> Protestantism and Catholicism combined. They just never got into
> all the apostasy of the Western Churches, therefore are closer
> to original doctrines. ... Before yo
DavidM wrote:
By the way, I agree with your argument that believers partake of the divine
nature. I think your argument would be stronger by appealing to Scripture
rather than the Eastern Orthodox tradition.
2 Peter 1:4
(4) Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that
Because you repeat it in a way that mocks him rather
than try to understand what he
communicates here regardless of whether you agree
with him or not. jt
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 16:48:45 -0600 "Bill Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 06:44:48 -0600 "Bill Taylor" <[EMAI
Bill Taylor wrote:
-
Original Message -
From:
Dave
Hansen
To:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent:
Thursday, April 07, 2005 7:58 AM
Subject:
Re: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not " loving"?
Bill Taylor wrote:
- Original Message -
From:
Dave Hansen
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 7:58
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not "
loving"?
Bill Taylor wrote:
It was tongue in cheek, DaveH -- ironic, too,
since I'm o
Isn't this a mind-blowing statement Izzy? and one
that directly contradicts God's Word which
states that "We (who are born again and now
indwelt by the Holy Spirit) have the mind of Christ"
(1 Cor 2:16, John 15:14,15) - Lance why what reason
would you have to exclude DavidM? Why
would he h
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 06:44:48 -0600 "Bill Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
It was tongue in cheek, DaveH -- ironic, too, since
I'm one of the few here who could say it that way.
So you wrote
"Any parent who would not
send their wicked son to the damnation of hell would be a wicked
parent.
Amen and Amen,
Well said - Nothing like plainness of speech to
communicate the oracles of God.
judyt
On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 17:15:54 -0500 Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
Try to grt over the idea that the Church is a small or large
organization. It is neither It is a living org
David Miller wrote:
Terry wrote:
> I think that when He said, "Church", He meant
> Church. If He had meant churches, He would
> have said churches.
I agree. He meant church. The question is, did he have a
specific church in mind, or did he have a huge worldwide o
JD writes: In
Col 1:17ff, we find the fact of reconciliation presented
and the purpose of this reconciliation put forth. We have been
reconciled so that we might be holy, blameless and above reproach in His
sight. How can young people benefit from
this teach
Lance, would that be the "inspired
authors" like St. Paul,
who you believe knows less than Barth? Izzy
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 2:54 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 12:30:54 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Et al: I have been doing a
little thinking about various aspects of my counseling ministry in view of the
triune considerations. And I see, almost
daily, the value of the teaching. In II Cor 5:21, we are told that
Christ became si
Your mind and His mind are NOT ONE, whatever your 'office', David. NO
INDEED, what you did give, do give and, will give in the future is an
interpretation - yours. That would be placing you in a position along the
the 'inspired' authorsdon't think so.
- Original Message -
From: "Dav
Terry wrote:
> I think that when He said, "Church", He meant
> Church. If He had meant churches, He would
> have said churches.
I agree. He meant church. The question is, did he have a
specific church in mind, or did he have a huge worldwide organization in mind
like Roman Catholicism o
DAVEH: > I suspect this is a perplexing problem for guys
> like DavidM. ... While I know little of PH, I
> suspect he may not be much different than
> DavidM in his thinking. Yet one has went over
> the edge, while the other has held his inner beliefs
> in check. I wonder why the diffe
Bill wrote:
> It seems to me that "Christians" want to talk tough and
> sound righteous -- but do nothing, and this so the blood
> will be on their Lord's hands.
Careful, Bill. I know too many people who would take this as an incitement
toward following in Paul Hill's steps. I believe that spir
DAVEH:
> What do you want to bet that PH thought
> he was God's executioner..
No, he did not view himself that way. He was acting in defense of the
unborn children, not carrying out God's judgment. He believed that
vengeance belongs to the Lord.
Peace be with you.
David Miller.
---
Lance wrote:
> You mean, of course, your interpretation of what
> Jesus taught us about hell...right?
No. I mean what Jesus taught. If you think my understanding of what he
taught is incorrect, then you would have a responsibility to correct me on
that. We are obligated to abide in the doctri
DAVEH:
> I don't know if Paul Hill ever said something to the effect..
> I hope you burn in hell.
> ...but who would be surprised if he did! And.wouldn't
> you think he was angry and vengeful?
He was consistent in his dogma that he only acted to save the unborn
children that day. His ra
David Miller wrote:
Terry wrote:
Jesus said," On this rock, I will build my Church"
(singular, one.)
Yes, but what did he have in mind when he said that? ===
I think that when He said, "Church", He meant Church. I
DaveH wrote:
> ... it now occurs to me ... that DavidM is probably
> TT's most prominent example of a Christian eager
> to condemn a person to eternal torture.
Good. At least now I can set you straight that your perspective is a
misunderstanding.
DaveH wrote:
> DavidM has several times mentione
Terry wrote:
> Jesus said," On this rock, I will build my Church"
> (singular, one.)
Yes, but what did he have in mind when he said that? It seems to me that he
had the local church in mind. Taking this verse alone, it might be that he
had one gigantic worldwide church in mind, but considering
Terry wrote:
> Is it your opinion that everyone with a word
> of prophecy is a prophet?
No.
Terry wrote:
> Why would all need to prophesy?
It is not so much that we all NEED to prophesy, but rather that we all get
to prophesy. The Hebrew Scriptures teach us that the Lord desired for all
his
J
Oh, beans !
JD
In a message dated 4/7/2005 8:21:26 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
JD, now youâre off on your own tangent again. Too bad the good stuff couldnât last. Izzy
Oh, beans !
JD
In a message dated 4/7/2005 7:15:03 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"Any parent who would not send their wicked son to the damnation of hell would be a wicked parent."
More than the remarks of Bill Taylor and your subsequent words, this statement reflects the opinion of
In a message dated 4/7/2005 3:04:52 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
JD, just when Iâm about to give up on you, you come up with something as sane as this. I donât know if it came out of too many red beers or a moment of sobriety, but thatâs good stuff. Izzy
âAnd at presentâi
In a message dated 4/7/2005 12:30:02 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
DAVEH: Ahh..but then I would be missing your posts, Judy! Even when you post drivel, I cherish it O:-)
I know I am included but this is still funny.
Jd
In a message dated 4/6/2005 11:11:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
JD however, will probably negate Vs.12 with Vs.13 sadly
What would you have me to do, fair lady? Cut and paste. Ignore. Or use it as a part of the same thought?
Jd
In a message dated 4/6/2005 11:05:13 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bold black is JD's response
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005 23:56:52 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Et al:
I have been doing a little thinking about various aspect
JD, now you’re off on your own
tangent again. Too bad the good stuff couldn’t last. Izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005
8:01 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What
exactly
Some of my best friends are old far__
- Original Message -
From:
Terry Clifton
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: April 07, 2005 08:26
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Apostasy
Lance Muir wrote:
Saving the appearance: Does each
socio-political-the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 4/6/2005 9:48:29 PM
Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"Any
parent who would not send their wicked son to the damnation of hell
would be a wicked parent."
More than the remarks of Bill Taylor and your subs
In a message dated 4/6/2005 10:44:44 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
DAVEH: Phil 2:12.???
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where does it say that you work your way into heaven?
Jd
Lots of people would agree with your use of Philip 2:12,13. For me, I believe that r
Thanks, Blaine. I appreciate that. But, I just reflected your statement
back to you, but changed the names. from me to you, and etc. I did this to
demonstrate that the same relationship you examined between the orthodox and
protestant church can be said between the protestant and mormon church
Bill Taylor wrote:
It was tongue in cheek, DaveH --
ironic, too, since I'm one of the few here who could say it that way.
DAVEH I was hoping that was the situation. FWIWIt might keep some
folks from getting their noses bent out of shape if you'd use smilies
when doing such.
David Miller wrote:
DaveH wrote:
The problem in the LDS organization, however,
is that you guys have only one prophetDAVEH:
That is incorrect, DavidM.
The President (e.g., Gordon Hinckley) is the guy I always hear referred to
as prophet. Are his two counsellors also
In a message dated 4/6/2005 9:48:29 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"Any parent who would not send their wicked son to the damnation of hell would be a wicked parent."
More than the remarks of Bill Taylor and your subsequent words, this statement reflects the opinion of a
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 06:44:48 -0600 "Bill Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
It was tongue in cheek, DaveH -- ironic, too, since
I'm one of the few here who could say it that way.
So you wrote
"Any parent who would not
send their wicked son to the damnation of hell would be a wicked
pare
PERRY write: OoooH! Your ignorance and narrowness are showing, Blaine--the
Protestant Church has more members/adherants than Mormonism. They just never
got into all the apostasy of the Mormon Churches, therefore are closer to
original doctrines. YOU are the apostates, the heretics, the sects.
Blaine wrote:
> ... the Eastern Orthodox Church has more members/adherants than
> Protestantism and Catholicism combined. They just never got into
> all the apostasy of the Western Churches, therefore are closer
> to original doctrines. ... Before you write more to condemn that
> which you OBVIOUS
DaveH wrote:
> The problem in the LDS organization, however,
> is that you guys have only one prophetDAVEH:
> That is incorrect, DavidM.
The President (e.g., Gordon Hinckley) is the guy I always hear referred to
as prophet. Are his two counsellors also called prophets?
Do I have it wrong in thi
It was tongue in cheek, DaveH -- ironic, too, since
I'm one of the few here who could say it that way.
Oh, and the Paul Hill twist is interesting. We're
to consign our wicked children to hell's damnation, but Paul Hill was taking
vengeance into his own hands while doing the same to a wicked
Lance Muir wrote:
Saving the appearance: Does each
socio-political-theological-epistemological grouping have
representatives who are capable of making a case for that which is and,
that which is not? It does!
I'm
Judy Taylor wrote:
Hi DaveH, No Paul Hill did not represent
either God's zeal in our generation or any of the nine fruit of the
Holy Spirit.
This is why obedience is so important.
God does not use 'lone rangers' like Paul Hill who take the civil law
into their own hands and bre
Good for you! Now you know that you can save time and cyper ink in
reading/responding to anything written by mois.
- Original Message -
From:
ShieldsFamily
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: April 07, 2005 07:13
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Legalism
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005
5:09 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Legalism
You are both in the 'Jesus loop'. You needn't care a whit
'bout any other 'loop' whether such a
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005
4:43 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Legalism
I'm just the latter. In one of my favourite movies 'About a
Boy', the character is asked 'Surely
You are both in the 'Jesus loop'. You needn't care
a whit 'bout any other 'loop' whether such a 'loop' would include Barth or
Torrance.
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: April 07, 200
I believe the key to be the fact that T.F.
Torrance approves of Barth and both of them get off on "the centrality of
the incarnation" as per the Review below by Torrance. We are just "out of
the loop" Izzy. jt
"The Development of Barth's Theology," moves from his early liberalism
through
I'm just the latter. In one of my favourite movies
'About a Boy', the character is asked 'Surely you can't be as empty as you
appear?' His answer: 'Well, yes, actually I am."
PS:Kripy Kreme went broke up here. They could not
compete with the mighty Tim Horton's fabulous coffee and etc.
-
Lance, too many Krispy Kremes will not
only make one LOOK like a Krispy Kreme, but will apparently turn one’s
theological sensibilities to mush also. In WHAT WAY do you think Barth is
more “knowledgeable” than Paul was? Theologically? If so, please explain how the one
who was personally
Regardless of how narrow you want to define/refine it,
I suspect there are believers who
are eager to send folks to an eternal physical torture. In my parallel
post, I used the example of where you (DavidM) might be the most eager TTer to
execute a transgressor, which in effect is a speedy
I have been doing a little thinking
about various aspects of my counseling ministry in view of the triune
considerations. And I see, almost daily, the value of the
teaching. In II Cor 5:21, we are told that Christ became sin
(assumed all sin) so that in Him, we might become righteous.
R
I was. I 'read' his remarks as being playful in a
somewhat uncharacteristically harmful way toward you.
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: April 07, 2005 05:05
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
Since I don't play I assumed you were addressing
DaveH - were you?
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 04:57:12 -0400 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
To whom did you believe me to have been speaking?
What do you think I meant by remark?
From: Judy Taylor
Not a kind or loving
re
To whom did you believe me to have been speaking?
What do you think I meant by remark?
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: April 07, 2005 04:41
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not "
On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 00:20:10 -0700 Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
jt: Hi DaveH, No Paul Hill did not represent either God's zeal
in our generation or any of the nine fruit of the Holy Spirit.
DAVEH: ??? Are you suggesting PH was not a
Christian, Judy? I assume he was, and
Not a kind or loving remark -
especially from one on the liberal/broad road.
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 04:24:42 -0400 "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Better to play with a ball of string than a
mouse. The latter reflects something less becoming in you.
From: Dave Hansen Judy T
I believe it was Ahab who said 'Thou art NOT the
man.'
- Original Message -
From:
Dave Hansen
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: April 07, 2005 03:26
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Apostasy
DAVEH: Ah yes.I see what you mean.
ButI'll let John answer y
Better to play with a ball of string than a mouse.
The latter reflects something less becoming in you.
- Original Message -
From:
Dave Hansen
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: April 07, 2005 03:20
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not "
loving"?
Judy Ta
DAVEH: Ahh..but then I would be missing your posts,
Judy! Even when you post drivel, I cherish it O:-)
Judy Taylor wrote:
On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 23:48:14 -0700 Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DAVEH: I hardly have enough time to read the TT
DAVEH: Ah yes.I see what you mean. ButI'll let John answer
you on that one, Lance!!! :-D
Lance Muir wrote:
Saving the appearance: Does each
socio-political-theological-epistemological grouping have
representatives who are capable of making a case for that which is an
Judy Taylor wrote:
Hi DaveH, No Paul Hill did not represent
either God's zeal in our generation or any of the nine fruit of the
Holy Spirit.
DAVEH: ??? Are you suggesting PH was not a Christian, Judy? I
assume he was, and that most Protestants accept him as such. That you
On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 23:48:14 -0700 Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DAVEH: I hardly have
enough time to read the TT posts every night. I noticed that hardly
anybody took my advice and only posted once per day while I was gone last
week!!! Whewam I ever tired from
Saving the appearance: Does each
socio-political-theological-epistemological grouping have representatives who
are capable of making a case for that which is and, that which is not? It does!
- Original Message -
From:
Dave Hansen
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
S
78 matches
Mail list logo
